Was WW2 the last open conflict in which the US was morally superior

>>1843921
>the US was morally superior to its enemies?

Doubtful
The US genocided millions of Japanese civilians through firebombings between 1942 and 1945 while Japan never killed any US civilian (the few that died at Pearl Harbour were hit by US fire)

>>1843938
The case study of China shows that the Japanese were far more brutal to the civilian populations they could get their hands on

>>1843921
>morally

Murdering thousands of Germans and Nips cannot be morally justified no matter what you do.

>>1843938
>while Japan never killed any US civilian

yeah, because they literally couldnt do so logistically. They did however slaugher millions of Chinese and Filipinos

I'd say we were morally superior to the North Vietnamese, and the Iraqis DESU
Aside from a few occasions like My Lai, we never intentionally targetted civilians, while the NV made it their prime objectvie to terrorize and murder villagers who didn't bow down to them.

Chink and Aussie lies, Japan was merely trying to free Asia of poisonous Westerners.

>>1843971
Don't forget the Brits and Australians in Singapore.

>>1843921
Very few wars have Jack shit to do with morals and ethics. War as an action is terrible and can never be considered a morally good thing. Maybe a necessary action at times but to consider any war to be morally is to be ignorant.

>>1843975
>I'd say we were morally superior to the North Vietnamese, and the Iraqis DESU

Definitly
Americans were merely invading a country at the other side of the globe to impose their ideology, while these filthy gooks shamelessly defended their homeland

>>1843988
""""""defended""""""""

>>1843946
why not?
we've been murdering since civilization started
depends on what you could consider moral
violence is moral

>>1843997
You can't just put meme quotes around every word, laddo. Had he said "successfully" you could have, but he didn't.

>>1843988

>North Vietnamese Soldiers invading their Southern Neighbor.

> Muh defending "their" country.

>>1843921
>morals
Getting spooky in here

>>1844008
NORTHERNERS GO HOME

>>1843921
>looks at Okinawa
>looks at Guam
just

>>1844016
h-how did you know

>>1844013

the only "spook" here is your sex life

>>1844028
Women are a spook anon

>>1843921

North Korean aggressors
North Vietnamese aggressors
Islamic Jihadists (Lebanon)
Iraqi aggressors (Kuwait)
Somali warlords
Terror-supporting governments (Afghanistan and Iraq)

Moral superiority is never free from subjectivity, but I feel okay saying all the above can go fuck themselves as human beings.

>>1843946
But they murdered far more

>>1843921

the only wars were the US were the bad guys were all those meme wars in south america and against the indians

>>1843975
Iraq was an aggressive invasion. You can make the argument that Vietnam was legitimate, but the North Vietnamese truly believed they were liberating their brothers and uniting their homeland.

>>1843938
The Japanese interned American Civilians in Manila within an old Spanish University. It was holocaust tier conditions.

>>1844068
Aggressive doesn't have anything to do with moral superiority.
The Iraqis were the ones who invaded another state to get their oil, and Saddam was a dictator who gassed Iraqi minorities, so yes, I feel safe in claiming moral superiority of the coalition forces here.

>>1844060
This. The US has had the moral high ground SINCE WW2.

>>1844077
Iraqis did nothing wrong in 2003.

>>1843921
No one can prove whether or not the USA was morally justified in any conflict. Only give their opinions why or why not.

>>1844108
Or an imperialist power choosing what side would give it the most benefit

File: 28412573513_1e4c1a34e2_k.jpg (373KB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

373KB, 2048x1365px

>>1843921

The influence of the United States has made the entire world a much safer place for everybody.

Does that mean that the US never screws up? Of course not.

Does that mean that Americans don't have selfish motives? Nope.

But the general peacefulness of the world is a direct result of Pax Americana.

>>1844142
But since profit for America is the spreading of democracy, human rights and peace, its pursuit of this is a moral high-ground.

>>1844154
>But the general peacefulness of the world is a direct result of Pax Americana.
I wouldn't say that's necessarily true. Nuclear weapons are as much if not more of a cause for the current "peaceful" situation (which isn't actually very peaceful at all)

United states was 8x as morale as the vc/sadam/soviets/north koreans

They werent morally perfect, they did make small bits of profit, but if you think those groups were nicer than the u.s. you are a youtube comment tier historian.

Iirc the u.s. holds a shitload of pow records in a lot of wars.

>>1844162
But it is. America's supreme military might and cultural hegemony, have shown to be quite effective in creating an intricate web of alliances. No major inter-state war have been fought in a long time. The only time there's major conflicts (like in Syria), is when uppity dictators like Putin puts their nose into the business.

>>1844156
I don't think America is successful at spreading human rights

File: rtn_191605.jpg (189KB, 1920x521px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 1920x521px

>>1844162

>I wouldn't say that's necessarily true.

I disagree.

>Nuclear weapons are as much if not more of a cause for the current "peaceful" situation

Not many countries have nuclear weapons and that's a good thing. Most countries simply rely on the the US to protect them. Without the US to fill that role, every country would need a nuclear arsenal to be secure. That's a scary world.

>(which isn't actually very peaceful at all)

Every year, millions of people are being lifted out of poverty by the magic of free market capitalism. Every year, deaths from war and disease go down. Average lifespan is going up. Literacy is at a global all-time-high. Yes, the world is shit, but it is considerably less shit than it could be.

>>1844172
How was the US more moral than Vietnam?

File: spook.jpg (33KB, 390x310px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 390x310px

>morally superior

>>1843938
Japan killed about 40 on the West Coast via the balloon bombs.

>>1844156
How could you possibly say that in the wake of the chaos and destruction America left behind in our own lifetime in Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria?

>>1844246

The vast majority of humanity does not live in those places.

>>1844216
The US wouldn't have invaded at all if the North didn't have a bee up their bonnet about freeing the South from their own devices.

>>1844206
While of course not to the standards of a modern Western country, it has been pretty progressive in Asia, and even somewhat effective in certain African states.

>>1844256
Whats your point?

>>1843921

We had the moral high ground in Vietnam, believe it or not. We lost it, but even then things would have been better if US efforts had been fruitful.

>>1844246
>Serbia
Stopped genocidal Putinites.
>Afghanistan
Sweet Jesus, just learn to google at least.
>Iraq
Real, tangible threat against staunch allies, had already proven twice to be an aggressive, expansionist power with genocidal tendencies.
>Libya
Intentions were good, execution incredible poor
>Syria
Ehh?

File: image.jpg (184KB, 901x1200px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 901x1200px

>>1844060
>Iraq
>terror-supporting government

>>1844246
>Serbia
A bunch of ethnics and muslims start butchering each other, the world begs big bad America to do something to stop it, and we did.
>Afghanistan
A theocratic, oppressive government gets overthrown, the US then shits wells, schools, and makes the locals let girls be educated, how is this bad again?

>>1844154
>what are nuclear weapons

>>1844183
>what was Korea
>Vietnam
>Iraq-Iran
>DRC 1 and 2
>Israeli-Arab wars
>wars throughout south Asia

You do realize that there were fewer battle deaths 1815-1914 than 1950-2010?

>>1844210
>Most countries simply rely on the the US to protect them.

From who?

The post-1950 US has caused a lot of wars. I'd argue that it has caused and prolonged more than it has prevented.

>Every year, millions of people are being lifted out of poverty by the magic of free market capitalism. Every year, deaths from war and disease go down. Average lifespan is going up. Literacy is at a global all-time-high. Yes, the world is shit, but it is considerably less shit than it could be.
Literally not an argument

>>1844293

>what are nuclear weapons

Already addressed this >>1844210

>>1844261
>>1844281
>>1844292
>>1844282
>>1844302
[Citation needed]

>>1843938
>genocided
>1942 and 1945

The word genocide didn't exist yet, and the legal definition of genocide requires that there be intent to destroy "a people", not simply "many people". In fact, you don't have to kill even one person to commit legal genocide, destruction of culture counts.

>>1844300
>From who?
From the Russians and Chinese, of course.

>>1843921
>morally superior
You understand how subjective this is, don't you?

>>1844316

moral superiority is objective

it remains true no matter what people think

>>1844282

>Stopped genocidal Putinites
Those "genocide" claims were a bunch of propaganda. The KLA was considered a terrorist organization by the US gov in tell a year before the USA started bombing. The USA has a tradition of allying with radical muslim terrorist to furthur her geopolitical agenda. Bill Clinton bombed asprine factorys and hospitals to distract America from his affairs in the White house. Now Kosovo exist as a corrupt mafia state with a permanent US military presence in Camp Bondsteel.

>Afghanistan

USA invaded, toppled a government they created to fight the soviet union and left Afghanistan a dysfunctional hellhole. At least the heroine started pumping back in the world right?

>Iraq

Was crippled by US sanctions for 10 years and wasn't a threat to anyone. Had nothing to do with 911. Under a false premise of Saddam possessing WMD America invaded, left hundreds of thousands dead and made it a terrorist haven.

> Libya

Gaddafi was working with us. We came, we saw, and he died for no reason and now Libya is a wreak.

>Syria

aiding radicle islamic rebels to remove a successful secular autocrat we don't like in order to install a muslim autocrat we do like.

File: Gt+correct+system+_f11a26d6ac72aa856686cb96f79e7a2f.jpg (40KB, 283x352px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 283x352px

>>1844362

>The US sometimes makes mistakes therefore Pax Americana isn't real

>>1843921
No side is morally superior in war.

>>1844331

How about no?

>>1844370
>No side is morally superior in war.

so the country that defends itself from invasion is on the same moral level as the country invading it.

sure. Self-defense can only apply to individuals, not groups. Even if a group is specifically targeted with violence, self preservation is immoral.